e e e sorry it's okay did you start your meeting start this meeting of the chouns planning board um of February 12th I am jar Conley chair and this meeting is being
televised and recorded live to be available later on chord tele media it's also available for participation remotely via Zoom but should the zoom go down we will um do our best to continue the meeting also via Zoom but if we're
unable we'll um continue the meeting live um first we'll start with public input and that will be limited to state ments from the public that which pertain to issues that are under our jurisdiction but which are not currently the subject of a pending public hearing
um before this board so um public comment of those will be held during the public hearings for those issues um is there anyone who would like to speak during public input uh seeing none we'll proceed we're going to take the discussion with the
town manager which is first on the agenda a bit out of order um and um next go to we need to vote on that do we need to vote on that no okay [Music]
no go to 250 Apollo Drive which is a request um for extension uh extension of the previously granted um special permit printed in March of
23 representing the applicant tonight is uh Jim Henley he's on Zoom Jimmy you want to just give a a quick uh refresher as to what the board approved and any relevant updates absolutely sure um could I share my
screen with the [Music] board more what the heck happened share share here it is oh I see I don't know if I've given you permission yet yeah says I'm
disabled make co-host okay okay no [Music] window entire screen here we go share okay thank you for bearing with me um my name is Jim Hanley with civil Design Consultants I'm
the professional civil engineer on the project um I get a call from the property owner yesterday letting us know know that uh this would be in front of the board a request for continuation so I just kind of give you a once over as
to uh what we did and uh what the project entails so you can see down here on our title block we petitioned the town October of 2022 uh for a uh proposed uh building
Edition to 250 Apollo Drive um the addition is uh uh has a footprint area of approximately 36,500 square feet and you can see this dashed line here um and this was uh a a
basically a two-story Edition but the only portion on the first floor uh that is uh built is within this dash line so there's another 10,000 square ft give or take so you can get a sense for uh where
the where the proposed addition was uh uh proposed uh the sizing of the building relative to the existing building uh we're located just outside of the 100 foot Wetland buffer but we did go in for conservation review and
essentially uh what we're proposing to do is take this portion here of the parking area um remove uh the utilities place the building Edition uh reconfigure the parking as shown and uh
provide uh provide the building addition so um we work with the town from I'd say the middle of October and even before that um with some preliminary reviews and um we eventually got approved sometime in the spring of 20123 for the
project so um I could show you another uh well I I think that that kind of gives you the the once over to what we were doing if there's any specific
questions on the application I'll try to uh to answer those for you I have a couple pretty basic questions I looked and had difficulty relocating the actual decision I could find the agend the um the minutes and of the meetings Etc and
the documentation um but I couldn't find the decision so my recollection was that we had granted a special permit for reduction parking correct yeah and then site plan maybe major business complex yep a major business complex was that
that was the extent of it was there so I don't I don't recall if it came under seid or not uh yeah it did so we were uh let me just kind of look from my notes here that's fine I don't know if we need the that that those specifics this evening
okay so then my next question is um so now you're just it hasn't been built so you're looking for an extens for more time to build correct y yeah the decisions call for uh um valid for two years two years yeah so other than that
there's no change no okay there there's no change at all no in and the the the use is uh very specific to the end user so uh that's why there's a a need to um uh request the continuance okay sorry what what was the
reason for two years why are you asking for an extension why didn't you bu it um so you know I'm the civil engineer but um I I'll tell you what I know is that the uh um the use itself needs to
have the end user in place before you would build uh build the actual addition um they've been looking for the end user for since we got the permits and just haven't found the right fit yet so EV is this tying up any sewage or anything for other
projects on the count for the over um that we've been holding for them for two years did uh Jim do you know if you paid any uh fees there was an agreement in principle I don't know if there was any fees exchanged okay so that
agreement likely contemplated fees to be paid um I don't know exactly how DPW uh would handled that probably the first of its kind since um since the um
limitation restriction regulation was in place my understanding in Broad Concepts is that the earlier people who bought sewer would be getting more of the lwh hanging fruit
and so it' be having better pricing um yeah I mean there there is capacity and there's expected to be capacity um annually uh but that's that's a good point that if they you know it could be a year
two years a number of years from now where the uh the buyin price is increased but that hasn't happened yet it has not happened no but we're not holding there there's no developments that can't get in because there's no se capacity for everybody right correct
okay thank you that was my point okay just one question if the board does Grant an extension is there um can that can they and construction does not commence can they seek an additional extension after this then we would have to Grant it but how long how long is our EX for
two years years years they're requesting two years why why two years versus a year like where are you in the process like is it really going to take two years we'd like to yeah I mean I think realistically the building's going to take a full uh 12 to
18 months to to construct um so we would need the the two years yeah did you have you found a tenant no no no nothing yet not not that I'm aware of no Evan for the timing they have two
years to start building right it's not it's yeah correct it's two years to commence okay so essentially we're if we grant them the extension it's granting them two years to find a tenant two years to P apply for and obtain a building
permit MH any other questions not here um I'll take a motion I I'll I'll move to Grant the extension I'll second okay all in favor
I I believe it was unanimous great thank you thank you uh next up we have the proposed Chum liting by law um no we
have Town manager oh Town manager back sorry sorry Paul I had mentioned uh I mentioned to Kelly about 7:30 for Kelly so if this ends early we'll find something else to to go to good evening good evening good
to be here um I imagine you probably first want to talk about 24 Maple Road um there are two articles but why don't we start with 24 Maple Road and um maybe best thing for me to do is give you a little bit of the the history on this so you can
see where I'm coming from and bring everybody hopefully in the room and those watching up to speed the contact that I received or information I received from Lock Martin goes back five months to September beginning of September right after
aay um at that time um Evan who's our community development director and basically economic development director um as you know we no longer have a full-time or or or any business development director um
so Evan is you know sort of filling that role as his C had been customary and then obviously I'm overseeing and supporting it but back at that time loid Martin um reached out to Evan expressed the need need um in an interest in 24
Maple the Maxwell site um and at that time they ex they and I'm going through my email history and explain to you they inquired about the possibility of a physical connection between their existing building in a potential new building at 24 Maple and the question
became was who who had the right ear rights over the rail trail right of way um and would we make the town make an inquiry to the appropriate state official at agency um that's at September so that was on the Thursday the 5th
going back on the 6th um the communication I had with Evan and basically reached out to representative Simon Cataldo's office and um could they assist us with the executive office of Economic Development regarding the air rights across the rail trail because at
the time again the perception was and the information was that they were looking to build an extension across the rail trail and we really wanted to information of is this possible and are there air rights and and what have you um representative uh and that at that
time just the board's aware I notified the select board on Friday September 6th that locked Martin had expressed the need for future expansion of its operations at 16 Maple Road and that the company was interested in the property at 24 Maple Road uh and the possibility
of an overhead walkway across the rail trail representative Cataldo's office got back to us about a month later on the October 2th first um and that basically all they were able to assern was that mass do had informed them that the rail trail now belongs to the town
of shord in Mass DOT would not be involved in any easement granting uh any followup um and that's sort of where it lied until recently um where the discussions
came place and they again met with Evan called Evan to meet with them regarding their interest in expansion um and that had followed the meeting that you would you had taken place in this room back back in um beginning of
January um in the information you know regarding the zoning conflict in the neighborhood um and again coming out of that meeting and the concerns loade had was I think they wanted to make it clear to the community and again reached out
to Evan basically invited him over there to the facility I was not present for the meeting but Evan reported back to me that um that they were interested in the expansion at the Maxwell site or the Agway site however you want to refer to it and Evan at that time suggested that the next step would be a meeting with
the chair and vice chair of the planning board prior to the February 26th meeting uh of which was scheduled for the resoning of the katees corner area um and and again I was copied on correspondence
um from the vice chair on the February 5th um and again there seems to be somehow this connection by some that oh this is just because of the town's budget difficulties let make it clear this has nothing to do with the town's budget difficulties we're not chasing
Revenue we've never chased Revenue it's not town it's not t of the town's plan and is not part of our plan and I thought we dispelled that notion quite sometime ago in the community we we basically look to be responsible to the
community in terms of our residents as well as our business investors in the community and one of the things we've talked about we've talked about for years is the whole idea of expedited permitting and I use the word expedited permitting not it's not expedited approval it's expedited permitting and
the nature of that and why it's in the development Community is because land owners whether they're residential or commercial want an answer in a timely manner and usually that's basically a 90-day window that they're looking for for answers that's the speed that which
they go at and as many of you are aware I'm the president of the middle sex 3 Corporation have been for years and have been involved with the economic development not only in chelwood but along the middle six three a route three Corridor for over you know over 15 years
um and so I I do have a little bit of the pulse of what's out there there and and and some sense of how the economic development works and sadly I've sat in this community and I've seen the loss of some of our cor corporate Partners such as mercury computer when they opted to
move to Andover and Kronos uh when they opted to move to L to the Cross Point Tower um and one of the things that we hear from them is you know what is the town's attitude what is the town's ability to provide us a
response um and they'll accept no for an answer if the answer is no um and reputation is everything out there because it isn't the case that a company comes in and says you know gee we're interested in your community they hire professional people and they're
they've already looked and know everything about you before you even know they're looking at you and many times you're not even put on the list of places they'll look at based on the research and work that they do out there and that's just that's just how it's done and it's probably no different than
what residents do quite frankly they do their research look online talk to others about types of communities and where they want to live and and and so forth um that's just the how the world Works um and and you see this you see
these concerns in other communities particularly you know you even reading about it last weekend where you know the the what they're doing in Northern middlex School District about a town of Ashby may be closing their own only school and what's that going to mean for the residents in their community and the attractiveness of their community and
will people want to still buy there or remain to live there so again coming back to this situation um what I'm seeking to do and I'm seeking to do here and I wrote to you and I wrote to the select board that I placed the article on the
warrant um based upon the feedback we've had from Lockheed um and I wrote and made it very clearly that in the event that Lockheed Martin and the property owner opted not to advance to their potential real estate transaction that I would take no
action at town meeting because I don't want to jeopardize the community by doing a zoning that we think is for locky and Martin then it doesn't take place and then there's a worst consequence to the community since that time you've received a correspondence on
February 10th um that was sent to Evan from loed Martin where they've now have not only expressed an interest to rezone to IA 24 Maple but also their existing parking lot at 14 Maple to IIA from CA
to IIA because they believe and they're concerned about and their their research comes that they don't believe that they can do what they Envision to do for an expansion unless the areas are zoned all three areas are zoned IIA
um and then the latest correspondence that came in this afternoon at 4:10 again makes it clear from lock keate Martin that they've received feedback directly from some of the planning board members uh it's their intention to be transparent and collaborative through the process they're interested in exploring what
limited IIA might entail with the town from our parking lot area and 24 Maple it's unclear if CB would allow some of the ideas to even be considered um we also have the opportunity to hear from residents in our their goal being LA's goal is to find a solution that benefits both our
company and the community we are committed to operating in harmony with the surrounding area and respecting The Village charm we've grown to appreciate over the years so that's what has guided my actions and that's what brings me here this evening
um it's very clear looh Martin is interested in expansion again I've seen it for five months you've seen the correspondence from them um and I think it's something that has to be taken seriously we have to
respect and I think they're trying to expect uh respect the concerns of the neighborhood um but my concern is if we don't do anything I just don't want to get a phone call one day saying you know gee
we we've relocated five down five miles down the road on 110 in Westward or someplace else um because what I see with lock Martin is a presence in the community for decades a responsible tenant a
responsible property owner a responsible presence providing well-paying jobs that any Community would desire in an interest going forward to continue to work with the community and the neighborhood so that's my opening statement I'll answer any questions that you have I'd like to and go from there
interject just because um I was a planning board member that was in touch with Lo Martin I was informed by Resident town that they had a neighborhood meeting on Saturday which I attended um their general manager from the building
um was there and was talking to the residents it was a great meeting um I think a lot of great ideas came out and I went there really to kind of get a feel of what the neighbors how they felt about it right like that was my intention um but one of the things they
he said which prompted me afterwards to follow up with him um was at the meeting they were surpris they actually you know because one of the and someone brought up the fact that they were asking for IIA and they were like yeah we're a little surprised about the waren
article um because you know we're just beginning our exploration we're just you know we're looking to figure out we they do need to expand you know Paul is absolutely right um they are at capacity and they're trying to figure out what they can
do um he goes but you know we're open you know like the email said right there's a lot of ideas came out they're open to having Maxwell's um as a parking lot under the current zoning you can CB um you can't like it's
you look at what they're selling you know like the the pamphlet for Maxwell it says office space it says part you know like you can have all of that on CB so those were the things that were thrown out so when I when I received the and by the way the general manager did give me his business card I'm sorry the
general manager did hand me his business card because we did speak about it afterwards um he's like if you have any questions you know contact me so when I saw the email that came out on Monday night was a very different tone than
what was said to the neighbors um so I followed up with the general manager and I'm like can you please you know we received the following email from loed Martin um I was under the impression that this was very preliminary um can you help you know explain to me
what my misunderstanding was um he we ended up um talking on the phone he was very transparent they have um he informed me that locket has not gotten approval from corporate even to purchase Maxwell's at this point so it
is very preliminary um you know when corresponding um with um Evan balansky you know obviously it's a lot easier if the three Parcels are zon the same to go
through the town right like and I totally agree right like trying to do anything with three different zonings on your Parcels is just inefficient um and they will you know basically like you know we want to get it you know zoned so it makes it easier and I'm like
absolutely totally get that um whether that's IIA or some sort of IA limited or you know whatever works but he did want to be transparent that they have not gotten approval from corporate to purchase Maxwells at this point
um and you know they need to kind of just figure out so I was I left it very open I'm like okay we're having our meeting on the 22nd you know the town really wants you to stay we really you know like you we're happy to figure out what that zoning is that you need to
make this work um so it was a very you know good conversation I just wanted to just make sure everybody is out there because when I first saw it I was like oh this is you know big bad corporate saying one thing to the neighbors and saying another thing to the town right like and I wanted to get to the bottom
of it um and I you know I had a great conversation um and I really do believe that they do want to work with us right like so I'm glad I personally reached out to them and got that cleared because you know your initial email is like well this is not what they told us on
Saturday um but that being said I you know I think presenting this at town meeting um in you know us changing all of that to I is very premature I think we should work with L and understand you
know where they are in the process like fight them in um and you know explore maybe an i a limited um and what would that be a special town meeting down the line I I mean you know we could possibly do I don't know the timing from like could we
do like a special town meeting on the second night of April like it could I don't know how our schedule is how that work is that a special town meeting in the summer or is it it could I mean we we special Town meetings in June for analog when we had the issue of the tip so we're not no yeah we we'll call it as
as necessary but I want to do like I think it's important for us to do the right thing for both Lo and for the neighborhood and I think that's what we all want um and I think they're running you know they're willing to work with us um and again like my biggest concern was like how you know how packed are you
right like how much space do you need um you know how urgent is this like all of that like and and he was very transparent right and so that's how we left it um um my fear as a planning board member
and as a town me rep is going to town meeting with this article right now that isn't fully vetted um we you know we've done stuff in the past where the town meeting has voted it down and I don't want it to be like leaving anybody with a bad taste in their mouth like or any
like I want us to really do our diligence and do a good job so we can fully support it for them I want to just say that we do have an open hearing on this property that's been continued so I think anything that
we discuss about it should be either about the process or something like that but I don't think we should actually discuss the merits of the zoning or not because we have an open hearing on that so I think it's inappropriate for us to have that kind of conversation here at this time public
hearing you know there's no open public hearing you've had a discussion for Zoning for Warrant article we also need to have you to have a public hearing right public hearing yeah yeah um so you don't have a public hearing now the January 8th meeting was
just a just a discussion the zoning public hearing is scheduled to open on the 26th right for all of the Artic okay because I thought we had continued it well it is two separate things I mean we were having a public hearing about the neighborhood and now we're
having hearing well yeah but I mean we were just basically we gave the impression that our discussions about this property was going to take place in at our next meeting not at this meeting so I think which Fair because which I don't I don't mind discussing the merits
of the of the warrant article as far as whether it should be a warrant article I don't think it should be um because I think it's essentially end running the this board um and I think it's perilous because I I for one don't think that I
could support the warrant article just simply because it wasn't it hasn't gone through our sort of normal process is this going to be our process is that the town manager is going to put waren articles and then have us play catch up either to say we agree or we don't agree
and goes the to the town I don't think the voting Town members the representatives are really going to go for that so I think it's I think it's a little perilous strategy um but if I could address that point any citizen or town board official
has the right to put an article before the town meeting Warren so this idea that I'm doing something improper is not factually correct I didn't say it was but I just want it was unwise it may that's not you didn't say it was unwise you you used a different word so my
point is my point is the warrant is signed in accordance with the charter in accordance with the requirements of state law it's going to be signed by the select board and then what happens is the planning board has holds a public hearing as you discussed then you make a recommendation a town meeting then
there's a debate a town meeting your recommendation is heard as is the recommendation of the select board finance committee there's a debate and there's a vote that's how the process works so this I I just really take exception because it's been said in some other correspondents that somehow I'm commanding the zoning of the town I just
don't think that's fair quite frankly I have a responsibility and I'm being nothing but transparent to the process now as I said earlier as I said earlier I I and I wrote and I I said earlier tonight I won't move this article if there's not a binding purchase and sale agreement
between the parties because quite frankly if there is and the zoning is contemplated then there's a public hearing not only for the town meeting but then there's going to be a public hearing for special permit before this board of whether you're going to Grant the special permit that's how the process works and I don't think tonight
we're here deciding the special permit because we don't even know what it is and how it's going to be so I think it's a difference between a special permit process versus the zoning process and so like I said I want to make clear that you know that that everybody has the right whether it's a citizen of the town
or other Town boards and officials and we' we've done this in the past go back as far as the billboard zoning that's absolutely right but it is a matter with that is currently before the board I guess that's my point is that this property and its zoning is something that we have taken up and are
considering in and have already had some kind of a hearing on it and so then for the town manager to come and insert into that process something else about that property at the same time is essentially saying uh I really don't care what it is you're doing this is what I think should
be done that's what it communicates to me at least as a board member but and I also want if if I said anything that sounded like I said it was improper I apologize I did not mean that what I do mean to say is I think it's unwise because it's a matter that we currently have before us and and and and I mean
again like I think Paul did his responsible thing right like you know I I don't think like I think he acted completely responsible I think um and he should have done you know well except for it should have come to the hearing when we had the hearing that would have
been the time to introduce this information that we're now hearing tonight okay or so at least come to us I guess maybe before what kind of a process are we having if relevant information is not being given at the time that the planning board is opening that matter to look into it but at some
other point when there's driven by some other agenda again agreed my concern on this is if this we start presenting this to town meting at this point I'm afraid that I don't want this to
not I want the right thing to pass for lockade and for the neighborhood so but one a second I'm just afraid if we start going down this process now this gets presented we debate it at town meeting this is going to leave a lot of animosity within the town and I don't
like this is like what I witnessed on Saturday was a very good discussion and I think there was willingness by both parties to come to something that works so so maybe so the there's the question of the warrant article and the question
of what specifically should happen with lockheed's request and then there's the question of the zoning of the neighborhood sorry um and I mean I guess one strategy would be
for us to say we wouldn't support the warrant article because we think there's there may be further discussion between the residents the town the planning board and the applicant to reach an
amenable solution that isn't necessarily the one that Paul is proposing yeah I would agree with that I think where we started getting to at the last meeting was that type of process and I
think based on whatever the project might or might not be we might have a specific IIA zoning or maybe we can make up a new type of zoning like we had discussed before that meets the needs of the
specific project that also satisfies um the the the applicant and also protects the town if they do move in the future because I think that's one of the concerns about this specific
change to IIA is that if something goes wrong and Lockheed goes out of business or moves that that leaves the town very very vulnerable because the IIA zoning in that area um leaves a lot to uh the
imagination and I think that if we can come up with a a zoning solution that meets the needs of everyone I think that's the best course of action and I don't think we're close to figuring that out yet so I think that this going to
town meeting for this specific solution is premature and I just want to also interject um they also did float and I don't know if they've talked to you guys about it but um even you know entertaining some sort of um deed restriction on it um they were willing to do so again I
mean I just think right now like I would ask that this this article get pulled at this time is my request like and let us get to the right solution and propose something a little bit more holistic whether that be on the second night
if we have the right timing or that's what I'm a little confused about because you're saying the second night is you know town meeting can no no town meeting can operate within the scope of the Warren article clearly the Ia sounds like it's the most extreme right so we came in with an IIA light or an IIA
limited that's within the scope of the article and that can advance a town meeting under this under the article but so that's why I'm a little confused about this idea that well we maybe we'll go with the special town meeting with it which which is fine I'm good for the the process but I just wanted to explain from my
perspective you know I'm I'm basically casting the big umbrella and it doesn't preclude the discussions over the next 11 weeks because I have no idea how long this process you envision taking out could come up with that solution and would allow us to advance that that that's that's where I look at it because
again I'll reiterate I made it clear that if there wasn't a binding purchase and sale agreement there's going to be no action on my article but I I didn't want to preclude that from happening in event that things do come together because I also was contacted by the owners of
Maxwell's and they're supportive obviously from their perspective so again we're trying to be inclusive transparent and open about the process so again you ask me to pull the article and then but then what do we then say I'm not hearing what do we then say to
Lockheed um about what they want other than we pulled the article and then what do we tell them that disc Contin the process that we started on J 8 right which they weren't present for nor was I they weren't they were here but they
they had Representatives right yep and they spoke I wasn't present for I got a question for there was okay right no but I just want to say that this again I'm I've not met in the well again I want I don't want people to think there's things going on behind the scenes talking I I have a quick question I know
you're talking about having this agreement in place but then I'm going to go to the attorney at the table here just trying for years we've stayed away from spot zoning and this is spot zoning if you're trying to change a Zone for one particular entity in town that's
better for the neighborhood I understand that but it's just for one client that's spots zoning it's not this is not people throw the word spot zone no no I'm just trying we we've always tried to stay away from it on the committee now for seven years we've been trying to stay away from that and this is like the seems to me is that's what I think spot
zoning refers more to the the particular partiel than the particular so you can change a zone for just one particular company this is pretty spot zoning well I think I think we have a broader question here I think as part of our of all the
discussions we've had uh including the ones where were just entertaining the possibility of some changes it became pretty clear that we have uses in our general IIA that nobody in town wants except
perhaps in very special and limited places uh and that's really what the problem is and that certainly points us to a limited IIA solution now a limited IIA
solution can be applied even to this bill because as you point out that would be a reduction in scope rather than an increase so uh and without a uh pns in place anyway the whole thing's going
going to be mute going to be mood so I would suggest that we go ahead with this and be prepared to uh offer an appropriate Amendment if necessary on the I think at this point
rather outside chance that there will be a pns so I actually disagree with you I I'm not a lawyer but I think changing a Zone while while the new while if we were to create a a different Zone
and that's less or more restrictive it is a different zone so I'm not sure it would be within that scope in addition to that this warrant article is for one parcel it'll be it'll be two Parcels
because 16 and 24 May three if we do three well if you do three if you do three that's kind of my point is it fact of the matter is there's a good size block of land there but having it in writing before we know what it is is not a good idea because it's going
to be out and public and people are going to see that text as the Warren article and that that that that that's a good well well-framed political argument and for why this might problem is not a that's not a good starting position to
be in as a planning board member before I can vote to change the zoning on something I need to see a plan are we talking a building a parking lot that's what I I I don't think we can ask to see specifics of a of a buildout when we're considering can we
can you add to this article then if if this was going to go limited IIA for ly Martin can we CH the intent in our the intent of our first meeting was to clean up the whole neighborhood right and and it didn't have anything to do really can we clean it all up at once it was there
was discussions that ly Martin should go away from there in that meeting too and when you say cleaning up what you mean is reduce the conflict right reduce the conflict so like the single family home should be residential not increase single family they're right now CB some of those single homes that some of the
neighbors wanted those changed can that be part of this article too then and let's clean the whole neighborhood right up yeah I think that's a better approach from present like like I mean I'm just trying to say you're going to you're you're going to spot in the middle then clean up the outsides of it I think that's again I and I think that's a
better approach even to get this through town meaning right like again the goal is to do the right thing make this zoning that's appropriate for this neighborhood that IT addresses the neighbors the town um in this business and then have to meing approve it they
are well and I think it's important that our starting point is that we're coming from a place that we would like to see Lo Stay we would like to see them ex have the ability to expand we would like to do it in such such a way that there's
you know we can find a compromise um maybe there's like like you said you know uniformity of those structures or of those Parcels rather but not IIA as we currently have it also hopefully you know something more amendable to the
neighbors I I had thought just you know it's 1.87 Acres it's the building is 9150 ft I don't know what size of a building they had envisioned to be on there but if there would be possibility for some um that the school could use
the parking lot is one thing if there could be a point a bit carved out you know one of the things the neighbors said is they wanted more of a village feel and so maybe there could be a small piece carved out that could have
retail and or a green space I mean like Jack if if what the bo what the share just said the board would would would act upon and basically make that some some type of motion I'll gladly withdraw the article and I'll explain to the select
board that basically the article's been withdrawn because the planning board has has gone on record of basically and stated that they intend to find just what you described a common solution to to to for the pr the ongoing presence and and potential expansion for loie Martin that it's in harmony with the
neighborhood that's something could done in January when we had the hearing that's the thing that's that's not what was that was not what that's you you what I'm saying if FY had come for at that point came out of that meeting in January we could have started this in January as opposed to that was not the
proper forum and then that meeting turned into uh an anti-lock heed sentiment no it did it absolutely did it absolutely I will say like abely the biggest abely did I agree with you on that it absolutely did so changed I had
to step in and suggest the the IIA light yeah so so that that IIA light is not going to take form in a in a consensus agreement in a month or two right you know that I know that that's why I don't want this article on
the spring town meeting because we talked about how when we started this discussion for that neighborhood we talked about how we didn't want to rush it for town meeting in the spring that we likely wouldn't get it done for town meeting in the spring and I want to stick to that because I want to make
sure that we're being very thoughtful about how we're doing it as opposed to trying to fit it Paul let me understand I think what let me understand I think what you're wanting is a date certain right you want to be able to say I'm not even ask for you're wanting to be able to say within this time frame there will
be some sort of resolution so the lack key can know okay I know that by April or May I'm going to know right it's the it's some it's some certainty I'm guessing is that why you put the article on to force essentially the issue to occur within a specific time frame that
is known and if that's the case you know that this board can work to a deadline we've done it twice now so I think that if if instead what you want is for this board to have resolved have come up with some sort of Equitable solution for everybody by some certain time frame
then let us know and we'll do that I'm I'm I'm not asking I'm not asking for a deadline that can't be met so I'm not saying it has to be May and so forth my concern was well the Chann article says that it's April but that's and the reason I said that article because the information I had after your meeting in January was that basically the sense was
lockings Martin's Presence at this location is not desired and that's still that's still an accurate statement as far as the neighborhood is concerned you don't know any different and therefore my my job isob I made it very clear I have emails I have emails from
Neighbors this board clearly Express not clearly Express anything other than tonight that that you're CH that you're now that you're now I Marcy you were at that meeting as well yeah I went to that meeting on Saturday too I listened to the neighbors you know the neighbors were very um complimentary of ke Martin
um they weren't we don't want you we want you out of here they even brought up other problems that they're currently dealing with with Lighting in the back and some of these other things and L ke Mar was very you know oh we can take care let's take some notes let's get some stuff done we want to make sure that we are working with our neighbors
um the neighborhood has some concerns and I kind of agree with them like you know are we going to completely build this up take over this SL add some more things what will it do again to that you know small town thing they even said hey this would be great here or doing this or doing this they also came up with them things and brought them to the
representatives from lot keed Martin so that meeting on Saturday I left feeling really good about it the neighbors seemed to you know share their thoughts and their opinions and they weren't we don't want you here goodbye they were hey this is what we'd like to see can you help us with these current problems
that we're having this is what you know we'd like to see not maybe go to the IIA keep it with the CB you know you do this in this year or maybe expand in this year so in the Neighbors at that meeting were very well received very well spoken
and you know want to work with them I think the sentiment you heard at that meeting Evan was anti-ia that's the problem and to change the entire area to IIA is is just for
Lockheed that may leave tomorrow who knows is a problem for this town that we've experienced in a couple other areas and we don't want to go through it again and so that is the sentiment I think that that was felt I didn't know
loed was actually considering expanding until the emails that never came up in January that's correct and I wouldn't I would and I think had we had we known that any inkling of it we wouldn't have even probably brought up that neighborhood as a resoning exactly
January so I think I agree which which speaks to part of our challenge about uh how to share information and how to engage which is a totally separate topic but this is another microcosm of process of communicating and sharing information doesn't exist okay can we just but at
the end of the day I don't introduce information unless I have authoriz it clear in specific authorization and I'm not blaming you it would have been nice for them to say that in the January meeting that hey we want to work with you because we we need to explain they may not have known that that was the proper
form okay regard I think we're at a point where I do think we should ask um and I did ask them on the phone they haven't gotten back to me what is their time FR like how urgent is this um and I did tell them you know we have the option of
doing a special town meeting like and um they were supposed to get back to me on that but I do think we like and they are coming in February uh in the next meeting so I think that's the question we asked them is find out timing here the open public they're aware of the Fe
February 26 meeting my suggestion for what it's worth is to is to find get clarity on um 24 Maple as opposed to 16 Maple if they are truly interested in acquiring that and a willing to put a
restriction on it for a parking lot or other things limiting some of the uh unwanted IIA uses or maybe not even uh um proceeding with any development in the short term maybe they should articulate that but I think it's
important for them to indicate to the town to what extent is parking expansion of urgency my understanding is their parking is maxed out mathematically they're operating under a special perit for reduceed parking therefore they
cannot increase headcount with people driving to the site makes sense so that in that is an immediacy urgency maybe 24 Maple under IIA zoning can be a an iMed mediate short-term Solution that's something that they're going to have to articulate and then the
board's going to have to come to uh I would it have to be under IA zoning yeah CB allows it no she no I I I copied I provided hard copies of an email from Council answering that question but Evan that email is confusing and it's currently in place now their parking lot
is in CB you need you need a use you need a use tied to the principal use their principal use is zoned under IIA not CB I've had this conversation with them if they want if they want to if they want to occupy the existing Maxwell's
buildings and use it as CB uses which is office then they could use the parking lot Evan you're missing my point their current situation is the buildings in IA and their parking lots in CA I'm aware of that they have a use they have a use
variance to use that parking lot so why can't we do the same thing we don't allow use variances anymore yeah we got rid of that some years ago you imagine you imagine use variances being allowed so then we do something we come up with a different suggesting is right tonight right here right now I'm
not I think it's premature to ask the manager to withdraw it if if locked clarifies gets a pns introduces some sort of uh voluntary restriction for the short term and it's made clear crystal clear as to what they intend to do with
24 Maple are they demolishing the buildings making expanding the parking lot are they keeping the building what are they using it for they as they don't have approval they saying right now right now none of us have any any scope or scale as to what the urgency or if there is any urgency if they can wait
which is exactly the reason why we should withdraw this no let them give them an opportunity to articulate it what if what if what if they come back and tell you they've been trying they've been trying to increase headcount okay but if they don't have if corporate doesn't say go ahead I
understand all that I understand all that and go buy it then so Paul can we if we left this in there do in for process yeah can you modify it once the select board signs it yeah the verbage does it have to stay the same well we
could offer a friendly Amendment am within the scope but it's got to be careful of scope why not why couldn't you just leave it in there now and then if we have the public hearings with the town we'll have our meeting with the neighborh as I as I understand the
warrant article pertains to what 24 it would then be and 16 it be based on the latest information they have if it if it uh applies to both then we would we would have a clear option to reduce his scope right uh with friendly Amendment
or I don't think it's I don't look at I I there's a lot of mistrust and this town's been burnt with a lot of changes to zoning I don't think it's I I just don't think it's to be care like be careful what we're putting out there especially where then we're
going to go oh we're going to change it because there's a lot of misinformation and people perceive information they see this they don't trust this okay I just think it's we should just we keep proceeding to try and illuminate you know shine a light in the dark places and figure out what
people what the neighborhood and what led and no one's disagreeing with that right so why don't we leave it here the disagreement is whether this stays in or not okay how about if we leave it here and we keep working towards finding a better solution and if we're able to
then we can present that as a friendly amendment to and and I think at that point the town manager would stand down with his presented warrant article and and if we can't then we can say we're working on this and we're not at a
conclusion but we expect to be at a conclusion in X time frame and I disagree with that approach I think putting IIA in there as a warrant article is a huge huge mistake you because people are going to latch on to
IA not let go of that idea no matter what we say or how we amend it no I've presented multiple times at town meeting and successfully I might add and
I think that's a mistake to put it in there given some of the questions I received at town meeting this past time that is a mistake I agree because I I I I think we the goal is to whatever we present we want it to pass and I
think again you know I I don't disagree that we C can change it I don't disagree like we have those mechanisms but again perception is 75% of the battle here right like and when people get things in their mind it's hard
to get them away from that to see what we're trying to do so I just think we should pull it for now and then it's not ours to pull no pull I pull it and let's work at it and let's you know next week we can find out their urgency
we can ask the questions and we can put what we need okay if it needs for the spring if it needs a special town meeting or whatever we'll like we'll work it all out all right so how I would like to proceed is that we um continue this discuss discussion at
the next meeting after we have more information from loed Martin and we can make a more informed decision yeah I I would agree's not spend a lot of time about whether we withdraw it or not I mean uh let's spend our time on what the
replacement ought to be whether we want a limited IA and and those considerations where we can actually contribute something so as the publicity goes out about this warrant article it's not our warrant I'll send them to you no it's not our warrant article doesn't
matter we do not have the option of withdrawing it it's a zoning article we will get complaint all we get to do is recommend the outcome I want to see is that Lees the best chance for success that's and if I'm standing here this evening and seeing four members of the planning
board who are concerned that this is going to undermine the chance for Success then as I said earlier to the chair I'll pull the article with because in essence I'm I'm satisfied now that the information is out there it's transparent and people we with of what's at stake and that wasn't the
case a month ago that's you and that's that's you ask me why did I do it that's why I did it nothing more nothing less I haven't you know I was as stunned as you were and that letter came yes Monday you know before the meeting and I voted it to you and I shared it with the select
board and and then the letter today so that's all I can do so I think we can probably stop it here and I think we can report back to lockie Martin you know as early as tomorrow as that we had a discussion we're going to pull the article but there's clear intent by all
parties to accelerate the consideration to facilitate their ongoing presence as well as interest in expansion in harmony with the neighborhood and I think that's what we all agree upon that's that's no so that's all I'm trying to do and nothing more nothing less all right okay
the second article Zing second article before we go on to that thank thank you no and you know thank you and and yeah all right the second article is also a Sticky Wicket um and this has to do with
the 129 Corridor um and again I'll sort of do what I did with the Maple Road one is give some perspective on this back the second week of January you know again we we Evan bansky and I received
word from um Doug Roby who's the property owner at 285 mil Road which is the just put it into perspective because think people don't often get addresses is that's the site where the lighthouse school was just at
and where um historically lifelinks was before then so 285 um mil Road it's in our overlay District it abuts the on-ramp to Route three just to you come around there before you get to Z and so forth Just because I think it's helpful to have perspective and why would it
would I do this uh and why would this come and they basically because Lighthouse school as we know is vacated the site they are interested obviously in renting the property um and the challenge that they have much like we see not only in
chelwood but Burlington and you know everywhere else is they're not receiving much interest in the office space use of of the um property they also didn't receive any see uh interest in terms of putting another school into the site um
so obviously they have Consultants they're in the real estate business and where they are receiving interest is in retail um and the more defined retail is in takeout
restaurants on the property and the reason for that is is because the adjacency to the highway the route three right on off there's a traffic light we know press CAF is across the street they're quite successful but despite our
vision in the overlay there has been no other amenities in that area and their suggestion was they're interested in basically raising the building the 31,000 ft building and then putting up two um Standalone um
drive-thru establishments which our overlay zoning does not per permit which is why the zoning change um so again same sort of Outreach um to let them know that what do they see and
the concern is that the cost the investment to take the building down get your financing and secure tenant for for Standalone freestanding drive-thru it's not going to be for a
plaza and basically you have to have what they call grade A tencies basically people who who have a track Rec and who can enter into a long-term lease and that generally tends to be your Starbucks and your McDonald's cors and those type of things those are the people who who can who can make those
commitments and can sign those leases in in the environment and so once again we met with them and and as and as Evan described The Next Step at that time was
to bring the uh information to the chair and the vice chair of the board that was held a week ago Friday I wasn't able to be president that meeting because I had a a commitment at nooba Tech regarding a budgetary matter so again I was not at that meeting
um and again my sense on this thing is time has told us what what has happened out there and what has not happened out there um I believe as I said in my memo that you can make the through your permitting process the
design of the of a facility appropriate as you did in the center with the CVS um because I know there were concerns they didn't want the traditional looking CVS in the center and it happened and you see it in other communities as well um and so once again I pick up the manter and put the zoning
article on um with again the understanding is that I'm okay with a negative vote um but I think that's better than not asking and I think and that's and again that's the sense we have from the property owner is that they appreciate
the recognition uh and the efforts of the Town um and that's what we're trying to do in this case um and I and I think that
it's it's worthy of consideration and that's why I placed it on the warrant and formed the select board informed you and why I'm standing here this evening is I you know I just think that it would it would add benefit they did
make a suggestion about a gas station I don't want to see a gas station I didn't propose any zoning change to put a gas station there but that's about the only other interest that we've ever heard out there that for that site um and therefore I think that what would happen in that
case because I understand there's a neighborhood on M Road you're not going to get significant traffic for this on Mill Road you're going to get 95% of your traffic is going to come from Bara Road and in route three and they're going to go drive in they're going to drive out and
and go that way and under the zoning that's out there it only allows us it only allows three of these type of we already have one at Press Cafe um it only allows three in total under our zoning bylaw and it only allows it in that little C Corridor of Mill Road before Z which is where this
is and Bara Road up to up to um up to um Alpha Road that's the only place that this could take place under our zoning and even under the zoning Amendment uh and again we'll continue to refine this uh because the most recent information we received from them is they they're
actually looking smaller in terms of seating and footprint of the of the of the uh driveth through um and obviously they they'd like the expansion of ours because 10 10 p.m. in our bylaw just isn't sufficient uh for any that nature
so that's what brings me here this evening to share this with with with you uh and I welcome as we just did your feedback on on this um because again I I I want to be always answer to to the select board to the community to others
when they say why do we have vacant space on on 129 or else or elsewhere why don't we have amenities out there and that's why again doing my job which is to be transparent Bring It Forward and
bring it to consideration um by this this board and the community I'm I'm just wondering why why we wouldn't make it a regular practice when you were become aware of these kinds of needs that zoning would help to come and present as you are and
then agree on some sort of time frame in which we will look to implement that and sort of bypass this whole warrant article thing is what is what I'm thinking that's the vehicle Joel the warrant article is how you change zoning yeah okay and this this is happening in
real time is that's G months whatever this is them coming out with us meeting with your chair and vice chair Express expressing their concern and and that's how the process works and that's how we've done it with whether it was you know whether it was Kronos in the past or or Z or others I
mean that's how the process unfolds is they come in in the initial stages they want confidentiality uh to the point where they're then ready to say okay we we we'll we'll bring it public so Joel Mike let me ask a question on Mike you've been on the board for a while is this a
regular practice for the town manager to put warrant articles I can't say that I've seen it but it's certainly been suggested you know and uh I'm not particularly concerned about how this how the stuff
gets on the warrant uh I'm more concerned about the degree to which uh we get to apply some thought and consideration to solving problem right and this may be as good way as any for this particular case uh the changes are
relatively small and they're quite well defined I mean I I welcome this but even beyond that Joel I mean Evan and I were the were the initial instigators of the of the um 129 not only 129 but more recently the Adu thing yeah we were the
ones who and not take take anything away from Chris of this board but we were the ones pushing this thing from the very beginning when we got the draft regulation there else is we going to get this in place before February 3rd yeah and then you folks took it and ran with it so I I don't think it's out of character for us to be
initiators of these type of efforts even re even in recent very recent times and Joel I do think that this compliance I mean we wanted to be complying with the law this one's slightly different because this one wasn't before us yet and this meeting that we had with the
property owner was extremely recent and so this is actually the first time we would have been able to get on the agenda anyway I get that um now being at that meeting I did share my concerns about these two potential
uses and or the two potential tenants and my concern about the ability to pass this type of change at town meeting for the entire overlay for these two specific restaurants so I mean wasn't
made clear Paul was presenting it more as a general type of um yeah type of restaurant but actually the they have a plan in place where those specific chains have presented a plan to the owner but I have a couple things food
for fast food restaurants Asos by way of review the zoning District envisions doesn't Envision Standalone restaurants it doesn't there was quite a fair bit of discussion on that and there was a whole committee before this before the 129 overlay came
out and they specifically did not like they spent a significant amount of time about the type of restaurants they like they wanted and they enion it required sit down table table and so this would be rezoning from
the standpoint of the stand alone also from the not requiring silverware not requiring service sit you know sit down restaurant um also you know the the the concept of two drive-throughs on the
site um would be require a zoning change I believe y um so it's quite specific um this proposal targeted to a very specific Vision you know at the
Gateway to the town um so I mean I personally think I really want to see these properties redeveloped and I would like to see more amenities on
um on Bill r road and in the Just In the Zone in the seid but I mean I I personally asked the owner slre estate developer if he could come back to us and and and Evan actually raised a
very good point of is there any way we could incentivize a property that a business that was more amenable to us as an amenity um in terms of maybe offering them a tiff or doing something by offering something by right
so that a different business than specifically a drive-thru small McDonald's or drive-thru small Starbucks could be interested in the site and so my understanding of the end of that meeting was that they were going
to get back to us I and my like I'm okay with if we want to get rid of the like it has to be part it needs to be like a standalone free thing but I don't want a McDonald's there that's not what I signed up out for as a town meaning rap
I'm sorry and I live at McDonald's like anybody knows me like I'm at I'm probably McDonald's best customer but I don't want it there I don't want another Drum Hill on 129 um and you know when this was passed with this overlay you know they were
very like it was zoned in a manner that I felt comfortable as a town meing rep to vote in favor of it um but they're not coming to us those businesses that we felt comfortablee wait a minute we had beehive come to us and they proposed what they were trying
to do and we were able to say well what we' really like is you know if you can put some sort of something cafe or something in the front right like on the first floor and they're like oh we would love that too so like again we've got
beehive going on right like like I just I don't think we should be changing the zoning because one property owner wants to change because that's all they can do um and again I have my concerns about this passing I again it goes back to the
trust like this is what we proposed to the town this is what we did um fine with it being like a standalone upscale restaurant like that sure right like that's a different feel like even if it has a drive-thru component to it or pickup component that drives through
like that I'm fine with I'm not fine with the fast food restaurant absolutely not I think that's opening the floodgates because then again and I remember this at Town meaning people especially when we started doing the we said drive-thru we're like okay now you're come someone mentioned this you
know we allow this thing today then you're in a couple of years you're going to come back and say oh we want this thing and now this is exactly what we're doing we said we said that we would they wouldn't do that but it's exactly what we're doing so if we open up one you know oh well
now you only have three well this property owner well we want that because that's all we can attract so I can tell you right now as a planning board member and as a town meeting route I'm not in favor of this so I agree with you and I did bring those points up at at the
meeting I think though that this is a different situation than the prior the prior um article because it was presented a town meeting we voted on in a town meeting for a
specific reason I think there's a good reason for the town manager to now bring this change up explaining the situation and letting town meeting decide whether or not we want to change it I think as a
planning board member I wouldn't support it and as a town meeting rep I wouldn't support it but I do think there's value in bringing it back to town weed this about 30 days ago right remember we had this conversation and I think the takeaway
Chris I think you mentioned it was that it may be time to go back out in the community and reset expectations update and reset expectations and unfortunately the way much of this happens is as soon as we talk about something boom coincidentally something walks in
the door and we're not we're not ahead of it we're kind of yeah kind of just started the conversation and then we find ourselves reacting so I mean so I I think if if Chris and Anita are expressing other sentiments which I I think I think
you're expressing mine um so one thing we could do would be to support the bringing of the warrant article which isn't really for us to do or not but not support the article John you want to say something I was just going to say for that particular site if you've ever driven by
there it literally looks like you could reach out of the one of the windows of the building and almost touch the on-ramp that's how close it is to Route three I think if you're going to do a restaurant I'm not saying McDonald's may be the right choice but you know we don't control that but I think um certainly a Starbucks I I can't see the
downside of that um I do think we have to look at with this could we tweak the zoning so that if there were any drive-thru restaurants that they're kind of down near that end of the of biller road so they're not Starbucks though
like you wouldn't have to change like um the reusable silver like Starbucks is not like again right like got to be careful with because Starbucks would fall into our current zoning with the exception of it being a standalone right but we know Starbucks goes into
buildings all the time right so that's a little bit different well and again we could do things things like having the architecture be you know not their typical architecture like yeah but then again I think there's a a little bit of a distrust
with like I think it's I think what makes people feel more comfortable with zoning is when we put that like this is what we want and we describe what we want clearly in our zoning bylaws um as opposed to leave it to seven individuals on this board which is why I'm not
proposing that this be a planning board zoning change that this is Town manager bringing it to to town meeting because it was a town meeting decision Y for the overlay with a committee and we don't a probably don't
have time to reform that committee and make these overlay changes so I think it makes sense to bring it back to town meeting for that vote now I would probably want some amendments to this article for like maybe um instead of
plastic silverware have bamboo or eco-friendly type of silverware but I would leave it as reusable because that's a completely outside of zoning yeah right I know but that's my point there's no there's no point I I
understand what the baners just trying to bring it to town meeting but there's no point in bringing it to town meeting if the planning board is going to be opposed and make recommendations or suggest a town meeting that it's not specific enough the overlaying of itself wasn't very specific it was fairly wide
open with the exception of very specific about what kinds of um fast food drive-throughs we were willing but it didn't talk about uh whether it was a McDonald's or chipot right you guys need to be really really cognizant of the messaging not
not just for this particular property but if you're going to if you're going to start having public debates about we're not okay with the McDonald's but if you brought us something else that the marketplace picks up on that pretty pretty quickly yeah so so that's not what zoning is
fast food is very different than fast food no a a if a McDonald's wanted to comply they could comply but they're not going to that's not their bu it's not their corporate business model correct correct but that's my point is that if if the
presentation were about another pressed Cafe type of place that's a very different discussion I I understand that but that's not the opportunity right and so or McDonald's wanted to try you know an upscale fast food my only point is you're not going to you're not going to
transition this article to a Project based resoning while you may be interested and the community might may want to see specifics as drafted it's not Project based it's not even property based I know but CH what I'm hearing from you is that's you're looking for
you you'd prefer an article that was much more tailored no I'm no it's being triggered by a specific project and I'm saying the trigger threshold is down here I'm saying I want it back up here the reason
it's being triggered by a project is because there's no other way to do Planning and Zoning in shums we you're unwilling to do a proactively we had the conversation 30 days ago and you guys agreed that it was time to uh update the community and and
and reestablish expectations we haven't done that right we haven't had time no I know but is of the essence now we have a now an opportunity walks in the door which in my estimation doesn't it it's a modification to the original Vision it's
not scrapping the original Vision it's changing a very significant component of that Vision it's readjusting the to realities we talked about this that's what the article that's what the presentation is going to be about I wouldn't say it's to realities I'd say it's to an opportunity that has
presented itself there may be other real OPP that opportunity is the first time that the marketplace has has has has expressed and and committed itself to chumford there's been no other Market indication there isn't
any and it there was this wasn't on their radar screen either they they they they articulated that and it's it's been some time since we've had the oval in existence but I guess what I'm confused about is what you're almost saying is that if Press Cafe were to move across the street into
a stand Standalone um drive-thru that would be okay but because it's McDonald's it's not okay and I guess because that's what I'm hearing is well it's got to be up here not down here McDonald's had an upscale restaurant why does that matter because
from the from the because what all the concerns I've ever heard about zoning were appearance traffic counts traffic impact and so forth why do we why are we so concerned what what kind of food is served at the restaurant or or what's going on there because it's the quality of the business quality of the business
and you're saying that the quality of those businesses wouldn't be of interest to the tenants and and users in the in the business overway district that they wouldn't welcome a Starbucks well the community or the community stbu disag Starbucks can operate within the current zoning as is written but not Standalone
without the with the exception of a standalone right but it can operate as is and Starbuck as a business model does go into locations by the way so does McDonald's there are cases where they've like because of the zoning in the town
they've gone into like a Colonial House like there's plenty Paul Paul's already indicated you can control the architecture you can control that architect I'm just sort of puzzled as to what that as to I think you're assuming what it's going to look like externally and internally that's why I suggested to
them that if if M if M if the McDonald's is going to build a new modern prototype that would be good to know but if it's like again like I this this zoning that got approved was it said upscale um fast casual
restaurant um it says um must provide reusable dinwar for Onsite interior consumption which we taking out because it was tailor to's press because we knew at the time that press was looking right we knew but Evan it set it set the
threshold up here we discussed 30 days ago that was a more looking back that was more aspirational the time we literally thought that the market would embrace when that was devel the market has not embraced it so how long do you want to wait and how many opportunities do you want to let go by and say we're
waiting for something better and I get that and I understand that and that's why I want to bring this to town meeting not and when and when we saw that and we allowed the plaza up right across the street that was going to be for retail the sub shop rest everything else and end up being rented by this special
services facility entirely and there is no Market that that the market has told us there is no such market for that which is why these folks can't build a plaza at their side either because there's no market for it you you remember across the street up in the hill remember they put they going have a restaurant and they the retail Plaza and
all get leased by a facility so I'm telling what I'm saying is the market is telling us what's out there let me make a suggestion sounds like you guys you're handling this one differently than the previous article so it sounds like it's going to advance towards town meeting
between starting tomorrow starting next at next week's zoning public hearing I can encourage the property owner to provide more information if they want to engage they can engage to provide more information um but I would encourage the
board to try to be open to that information between now and town meeting rather than taking a strong position this evening if you're going to take a strong position this evening then it's again it's difficult for the for that property owner to want to engage because you're already sending messages right right but
we've asked those questions we asked for it yeah why couldn't it be AIT we we we we agreed we didn't McDonald's wasn't our first choice and they kept coming back to look we we we can't there isn't the market for for for I think you know like I'm fine with
the can be a freestanding like I didn't didn't like I didn't realize we had actually put it that it had to be part of the building like I think like that provides a little bit more flexibility to be quite honest um but I'm not so like personally I'm not comfortable with rest of the stuff
changing maybe that's a friendly like and then I'm I'm not so I'm not as comfortable with the other items changing yeah um okay maybe that's all right I think we I think ex be this one to death should okay we have a lot of other things to get to and I think that we've
made some Headway and I think we should hope that the um owner would be willing to engage with us and give us more information about what they're imagining I will I will men him but let's not try to make this a Project based
resoning it's not it's not about their property they happen to be the Catalyst for the town to take to take action but but it's also constrained you can only have three of these we already have one this would be the second so I was going to ask question anywhere that no it's no
it's only allowed call that one area it's only allowed I heard what you said earlier it's it's allowed down Mill Road and all all of Bill rer Road all of All the Way Beyond Alpine past past Apollo yeah that's where we put that original
overlay for the three Drive in the the second and the third so be no more allowed we this we think Evan your sense in this is that if they put two on one side it counts as one or two I it's one permit but perm to your point
it could be it's two separate establishments SE sep drive so it's three then you're done there's nothing else goes beyond this because you're right we had change it right unless you change it but that I'm not proposing to change it if you got a capital girl that comes in with a drivethru and you'd have
to go back You' have to go back to the town what if if Burger King comes in they want one correct yeah but you have the town has to decide that by zon I'm not lifting the cap right okay right but but we saw that we still see that parcel sitting vacant that's been cleared Forever on Bara Road and nothing has
gone there right and that was before no this was before sewer they had the ability to go there this was before the moratorium and nothing went there that's my point is that while it's not technically Project based zoning it's being catalyzed each change by a
specific project we keep doing that yeah because the town's not um Expediting proactive planning to to to adjust to the market conditions and we discussed 30 years ago you're not even sure that you want to adjust to the market conditions and some of us aren't
even sure what the market conditions are right so like I said 30 days later they walk in the door and they're telling us what the market condition are well one property owner is telling us what the market CBR a commercial broker who represents you know meramac Valley down
what they want to tell you like I mean all I can tell you is who's come to us and nobody else has come you know like you know they're trying to get what they need in that area so they're going to kind of tell you what they want you kind of have to go and reach out
to yeah again messaging they're they're likely watching tonight or will watch tonight this is not the way you go about um engaging with people who are trying to spend money in your community it's this is not how to do business in a friendly in a friendly
manner I got to say if you want citizens to serve on this board I would not make make comments like we're not being proactive uh we're not doing zoning timely we've just gone through MBTA zoning we've just gone through the Adu
thing took up a lot of time I take offense to that got to be open open to the opportunity I I also take offense to it because you're essentially saying we're not crossing the goal line but we don't even know where the goal line is and I for one would like to have
conversations offline about how we can resolve this it's not that I'm not interested in being responsive uh I want to be responsive but I don't want to be criticized for not being responsive when we haven't even had the opportunity to even know how to be responsive I think everyone on this board wants to be
responsive and and In fairness like that was the whole reason we came up with our priorities of which areas we wanted to tackle we decided on Kate's Corner which kind opened up a whole another a place to start which is a place to start so we have been proactive it is part of our I
think goals this year um was to look at zoning so just because we didn't look at the you know because this property because this particular property was you know they came up and they had a different idea and that wasn't on our list does not mean that we're not proactively
doing this can we move along to the next topic thank you have a good night thank you Paul lost my agenda my pile of okay next we have
theing bylaw yeah got on it just just the right time all right uh Kelly be is with us Kelly you're on Zoom what he is on yes I here thank you L he's not on a boat thanks Council no
no boat not not in the Caribbean nope I'm in California okay so has everyone the intent here was to um provide an update this public hearing opens um next uh two
weeks from tonight um that hearing does not need to be closed uh on the 26th um this I think represents the final uh draft it's been um reviewed by Council it's been revised
accordingly Kelly has um made some additional final edits of it um it's in the draft War and it is uh undergoing a final uh legal format review by by Council Kelly do you want to walk
through any of the major uh changes uh you know really um Council had two kinds of comments uh one had to do with the the whole notion of how to handle special permits and I think that uh Evan thank
you very much for for correcting and updating the wording on that and the other was that I think he had some concern you know just to back up a sec the plan here is to make uh this is General by law so that when enacted all
uh nonon all lighting fixtures that don't meet the requirements are deemed non-conforming and there's a 10-year period to bring those into conformance but with some triggers along the way that might encourage uh the conversion ahead of time like say
property or something like that and I think Council interpreted those opportunities as um Evan correct me if I'm wrong here uh uh they didn't actually necessarily
had to have to do with ligting like a change of ownership and therefore uh why was the exemption called into question at that point and I what I tried to point out was that we're not really exempting all of these non-conform fixtures they are non-conforming and
we're just looking for opportunities to encourage their conversion to conforming within this 10year period ahead of 10 years as the case might be so Evan correct me if I'm wrong but those were the and they all good points and I think we've addressed them um and as Evan says
I think this is in in good shape and ready to go okay um so it does it does have a um a zoning article attached to the top of this page it's um on the screen it does have um
article 30 within the town meeting warrant as a zoning article that's to delete the outdoor Illumination in its entirety and then just add a new a and a new B and then the rest of it will be a non- zoning article um that will be presented as a
general Town bylaw I had a few questions based on Town council's um comments um Kelly have you thought any more about the ownership trigger based on the condo
and HOA comments how that condo and HOA comment was actually mine oh okay and I don't know how to approach that um I I can see it's a it's it's it can be an
issue because it's you know when when somebody sells a condo or somebody sells a home within an HOA those are you know they're all kinds of rules for those that that that um I don't know well how do you handle other kinds of
zoning bylaws in those situations like when you want to bring something into conformance um like U carbon monoxide detectors or something like that are there triggers that would apply only to one unit within a condo complex or an
HOA complex the the individual units are inspected upon um sale and then the common areas are um inspected either annually or biannually so essentially so essentially
for those types of exterior components of condos or HOAs it would essentially be nonconforming upon the inspection at that what 10 year
10e limit right unless the owner decides to bring him into conformance before then just voluntarily I think the challenge with with this provision as it pertains to residential or commercial
condos is um one individual unit changes ownership but they have no ability right and there's no relationship between that and the association well let's keep in mind that many condo
situations uh the owner really doesn't have control of the outer wall only the inner wall so I don't think this is nearly as big a problem as as we may be trying to make it out to be uh yeah you can do condos
other ways I mean it's there's I don't know that the law says that a cond condo can't include its outer wall but I don't think most of them do but my point is is that by saying that a property with existing luminaries that change
ownership for any reason is the trigger and the owner doesn't have the ability to change the external exactly you won't may very well not have it so they would be accepted if they would be accepted because they don't control that wall they don't control that luminary but I'm
assuming we should probably explicitly say that those are the exceptions I I I articulate I would I would clarify this because it's going to become problematic for condos for condos uh um
situations yeah I mean maybe for the condo association it's um 10 years it's it's not the individual change of ownership but they fall under just the 10-year the 10 year provision we've got the 10 year in there anyway that'll cover most of them now
for the HOAs that's a different matter because uh there you like have something so then just maybe just say this maybe just say 3.3.4 does not apply to individual sales um within uh condo associations or
yeah residential and Commercial condo associations but it does apply to um uh 3.3.2 to the exent individual condo owner doesn't control The Luminaries yeah I I think the goal here is is to
get the exterior lights particularly the freestanding lights yeah updated is Tom meing approv which would fall into 3.3 all of this yes all of this y yep yep so we've talked your point uh you
know the condo association or the HOA would would also um control any uh area lighting exterior area lighting or or you know post lights along the streets because those are um yes of under under
the developers control and so um I I think that's fine okay all right so we can We'll add some clarity on 3.3.4 that it's not triggered by individual condo we say I don't know if we want to get into this but we say something to
the extent of like if the condo association is doing renovations they would be expected at that time he's got that covered under 3.3 the the association and itent entirety is covered under 3.3 I I I have a issue
with the whole thing about the sale I I think if you're doing a renovation like that's fine right like you're I think trying to to either put a time limit on this for 10 years or B trigger it based off of a
sale I think like I think naturally if you have this type of bylaw like in this it's going to happen right I think it'll just naturally take effect I think trying to pass something like this with these
restrictions on there it's going to be problematic I disagree I don't think so and I don't I think if you don't put a time limit or something triggering it'll never happen people won't do it and people don't want noise pollution on
their property from their neighbors so I think it's going to pass and there are triggers already with fire with smoke alarms yeah fire detection there's all sorts of things you have to bring up to code when you sell okay going be a long town meeting if if I could just address
that a little bit let's remember that there has been in place an outdoor lighting bylaw for a quarter of a century that has largely been ignored anyone who has installed an LED fixture and doesn't comply with the old bylaw and that's virtually most of them you
know ignored the previous bylaw in the first place so they're already in nonconformance even if even if we didn't have this one going forward I'm using this and this 10year uh Sunset Clause as
a gentle way to try to bring some of those now already non-conforming uh fixtures into compliance yeah okay I think at a previous meeting if there's no more specific questions we've already did have a few more
okay um Kay 453 the holiday lighting given the town council's comments on that and the fact that it's really not enforceable I would suggest removing that
section I was that was another one I was because I think it's going to create a whole which one you referring to holiday holiday lighting holiday 4.5 I had concerns about it before but given Town councils um Town council's
concerns and the fact Kelly that you're I I understand that it offers a gentle guidance is the intent but having that in a bylaw is a little bit more than General guidance and it and it really is
unenforceable as written yeah I I I I wouldn't disagree with removing it um it's certainly so here's the question then you have to be willing to address
um some people have uh really extreme holiday lighting that you can imagine would a neighbor would find disruptive yep and if they're leaving that Lighting on all night long but it's temporary then you as the the aggrieved
neighbor have no real recourse um to uh get some control on that and maybe that's just you know the price you pay for not having any any mention of it in there I think though that in general it could it could be
covered under the more General um 4.5 where it does cover some of the more generic generic uh standards where it's turned off or dimmed um the more General guidance or or
uh information about the color temperature so I think yeah I think I agree I agree already covered in there and to call out holiday lighting just will open up a whole can of worms that I I think that's fine well you know I think that's let let me let me point out
that we do have other places in the town by laws where we make obviously unenforceable suggestions remember the uh the one we had for uh 30-day limit on political science completely unenforcable yeah
yeah Mike it's a good I don't know I don't know if you saw the flame war that erupted on the uh Cher news Facebook site about this I I don't touch Facebook with a 10- foot pole tell me about well let me tell you that that that I mean uh I think he's right this was this was a
third rail and I'm I I see I see little downside to removing it and potentially um lots of downside to keeping it so I'm okay with striking that okay all right yeah let whatever it takes to get this
or something very close to it past is that on on the string lights 454 yes question I had about that is when you talk about the lighting in total is that string lights individually
plugged in or is it when you connect the string lights together yeah because I'm thinking about how many string lights you can attach in series and so having some clarity in there about what a string is whether it's but
it it does what it says is such lighting not such Lumin a so it says such Lighting in total and I I think that's pretty clear but if you have five sets of string lights in one Outlet five sets in
another side of the building is that 10 in total I think we're overthinking this I'm just trying to make it clear so that when people especially at town meeting when people have questions and enforceability your points well taken that I'm just it
doesn't have to be decided tonight but that's just one area that might need clarification well it does it does say Chris such Lighting in total yeah shall not exceed 2,000 lumens I what does in
total mean in your mind in that context and but that's my question is it in total for one string or if I plug in but it doesn't say such strings it says such lighting yeah so all of the lighting of
this type on this property shall not exceed in total 2,000 Lun yeah I would read it that way okay that makes sense and by the way not you know I don't want to call undo
attention to it um there are lots of communities where this string lighting on Residential Properties is a serious problem for neighbors and neighborhoods I haven't really seen much of it in chelsford I have seen two businesses downtown that um have string lights that
use them as far as I can tell they're on all night and the holiday period has kind of passed but I I that might fall more under the sign by law than the string light bylaw because I kind of see string lights on a business as an
advertisement for that business yeah and then the last one 4.7 Lighting in a public way um I saw Town council's comments on that I don't know if you want to change that to Lighting in a parking lot I'm assuming it was more
intended for parking lots walkways on a specific property and not along the town roads actually it it so Chris let me give you an example of what where that applies um if you're a business along chord Street uh and there are several of
them and you want to illuminate your parking lot you contract with National Grid to put a a a large Spotlight up on the utility pole that is in the right away ah got it okay and that's what this is intended to capture
so maybe that's maybe it should be clarified to be public or private Lighting on public utility polls or something like that because based on Town council's comments it almost reads
to be Street lighting as opposed to the the indic what you described well I and I tried to I I had a comment about town council's comment lighting like would be covered here is almost is I I can't imagine it not being
anything except being in addition to whatever municipally installed Street lighting is already there okay so it's not in place of the municipal Street lighting and therefore is somehow unsafe it's just something that's added on um you know arguably the the street light
that we have is adequate for Safety and Security um that's a whole different topic but but this this is especially this is for and not necessarily be just private lighting it could be that the town or the the Housing Authority or something
wants to put up some extra lights on those polls we'd like to capture those and make them conforming okay thanks thank you thanks for your careful reading okay so in the past we have
already um expressed our support for this bylaw and I think that we can move on to the next topic unless anyone has anything further just one I have one question Madam chair um one is that there
was I think it was voted on that it would that the planning board would co-sponsor this but it doesn't show up that way in the in the uh bylaw in the article warrant template also my last name is misspelled I'll pass that on to the manager both
items thank you yeah I I I I think we should publicize the fact that we co-sponsor this yes y I think that's important thank you I I continue to be very uh humbled and and grateful for your support
okay thank you okay have a good night next up we have flood flood p bylaws updates and we have a same intent here um this reflects the um state
approved um proposed um article this is um compliant with the um Mass FEMA flood plane model um in addition to updating the
bylaw um this is also Sim simultaneously updating the um FEMA flood maps um as well as the reference to the um the studies that are um this section right
here the firm in the FIS flood insurance uh study reports those are dated July 8th 2025 that's the correct date that's the date in which excuse me in which FEMA intends to uh publish effective Maps many towns in
Eastern Massachusetts will be updating their bylaw and map uh references uh this Springtown meeting um unfortunately there's a lot of new text so this was not a case of uh deleted in its entirety excuse me I
thought that the probably the the most effective way to present this to town meeting was to do the the red line showing where there deletions and um where there's uh new text
um the provisions the existing Provisions that are local options to be more restrictive than the state models are still in here uh there are only a few of them uh but they they remain in
here um and then on the map itself's the map it is only the northern portion of chum that is actually seeing map changes this the central and southern portion of
the town do not have any um thema map changes uh the the changes have um Geographic areas being removed and others being added um I I don't know enough about whether the elevations are changing
significantly or not um that that is that information is typically within the the flood insurance study so that's the uh summary in a nutshell um we did this about about a decade
ago we did this exact uh this exact process with town meeting now who's presenting this was M yeah I mean normally and I always say I'm willing and able to present but again I keep hearing tonight about
mistrust and things of that nature I'm I'm not inclined or thrilled to present this on the board do we have someone who like from this who did this like study
FEMA having a little trouble now there's a Massachusetts um flood Hazard uh mitigation office that is the office who uh I worked with the lady who presented to you uh and who reviewed it and deemed it
compliant I don't know if they're generally avilable of one like if someone who had a little bit more exper like if they were there kind of like what we had for Nim Cog um they were available like get I would feel real stuck trying to present this because I don't understand it well
enough me neither I would be willing to present it because it's pretty straightforward it's changes that FEMA is requiring us to make take it or leave however I think having seeing if she would be available to also be there and be able to answer
questions would certainly be helpful yeah I I I think this one will pass reasonably easily but I think there will be questions and somebody who can give like the more specific specific related to this I yeah like I mean is this
something that Christine Clancy would be something Poss I can ask her if she'd be willing to stand by and help us with questions yeah I mean the last time we did did this we did not take we did not have any specific property owner questions uh and we referred them to the
actual FEMA um webbsite where it's very interactive um it's not intended to be property specific but I think the female website's down maybe no no no no it's it's it's up and running it's up and running um I was just on it uh yesterday
um the primary goal is to uh adopt the updated flood plane bylaw which is as Chris indicated it's very straightforward in fact it do the procedurally we're not changing anything but I will I will ask um
Christine if she uh is able to speak to the technicalities of the map changes and I will uh ask if the flood Hazard mitigation um office can be available okay that'd be
great okay we have no new public hearing we have 65 Dunville Road whom I feel yep I handed out a uh new slightly revised version look decent to me this hearing
is still open uh Chris Sullivan the the applicant is with us on Zoom hello I'm available CJ be [Music] quiet so Evan in the revised version um I mentioned this to you before the
meeting but you addressed all of the questions that I had um on the special conditions the Culvert clarification was a good one um I saw in our packet clean letters for DPW but I haven't seen one for the water
district or the um tax collector are those issues resolved I know John issued a memo it may not be uh LinkedIn but I'm certain on the um the on John the water district one uh while
we may not have a final clean letter usually their first letter says we want to meet with us yeah and if I remember correctly they had issues with the connections and I'm assum so there so so technically your approval
doesn't doesn't bound the water district they have their own rules and regulations they can require changes modifications it's more of a coordin coordination effort but because of the changes based on their initial letter I'm assuming
they're okay with it yeah I mean I haven't heard anything okay okay um there are no other questions I'll take a motion well we the public hearing
still open right oh yes so any public move to close the public hearing second all in favor I motion by Mike rbook second by Anita and then I'll take a another
motion I I would move that we uh that we approve the uh certificate of decision as written uh do we have any other I mean it's already got I think uh
conditions in it so does it yep so I think it's all here do we have a second oh second sorry motion by Mike grab second by Anita all in favor I unanimous good good luck
okay and just press continuation next up we have what did they request for continuation on pallet he's all s right request for continuation on pet until give a date I
don't know I mean did they specify yeah to 226 move to Grant continuation to February 26th second all in favor I I motion by Mike second by Anita unanimous um next up we have liaison
updates um nothing particular here uh I do not have anything at this time uh meeting tomorrow night have to give you one I know we have we have a v
Square meeting tomorrow night okay so I'll have an update at the next one when I I so the last um Center Village was at the same time with my fin so I was kind of do you want to do Center Village sure
all right perfect I don't know when the next meeting was so that was my next question so we're going to can we do a motion on that or do you want to put it on the next agenda so that it's on the agenda is that what's proper probably yeah so so appoint appoint Center village Village okay y if they're
meeting in the interval could she go as a they're meeting I think this Thursday yeah and I get finom tomorrow could she go as a yeah yeah as a temporary appointment tomorrow meeting tomorrow it's right this that would be
tomorrow pretty sure they're meeting tomorrow Y and that's here yeah it's usually in uh they meet in person and Via Zoom but in person it's in 200 okay is that going to be an okay thing for
you tomorrow Marcy it might be tough no I can make tomorrow's meeting uh Joel do you have any Le on I I do not because I had a conflict I couldn't make the port of health so I
apologized no that's fine if you have that I mean I'm interested in that so if you have that come up again and you want to just shoot me text I will I will do that it kind of came up last minute okay I'll try to do that I in advance but I'm close by
and found straight so Anita you no no no nothing and Chris concom pretty um pretty light uh hildr and palot were both continued uh yesterday as well so they'll be hearing both of those day
before our next meeting and on can you just refresh me if you don't mind what the what their issues are palot they're interested in the green space and the trees is that right and the removal of the parking lot and what gets put there yeah pretty much the same
plan that we were reviewing but those are their issues pertaining to bot yeah and then their is their their open issues pertaining to Hildreth Hildreth it's related to um the natural heritage
decision as well as a possible peer review of that report um that would then potentially um influence some of their special conditions got it
okay um I have nothing uh new business uh okay nothing there I don't think there's anything um meeting minutes um I would move to accept the meeting minutes at I have something I came late and also
left early um I was I was I was in Puerto Rico and oh God I haven't I didn't read them so I'm G to have to table those can we table those Evan couple changes I noticed that um if she can adjust on the Dunstable
vote Joel's name was missing and it should be a 7-0 vote for for palot my name was missing and that should be a 7-0 vote I think and I came in during the
open space presentation I missed the first couple minutes of that but then I was there I think I was there till Le on up dates but I said I'm going off when I went off okay yeah you had like a 5:00 flight or something like that what that you had
early morning flight flight yeah I had a 500 a.m. flight I had to be up at 3: and I was trying I was pinching my arm to not fall asleep I'll double check online I learned in residency um next meeting updates what do we have next meeting besides meeting
you we have uh pet the zoning public hearing um and the continued uh Kate's Corner neighborhood discussion and I think you uh slated it to start at 6:30 the zoning public hearing was advertised
to start at 7 okay we do pay that the first thing I'm sorry can we do the pay payet one first yeah I mean they've always they've been here for the past couple of months the last one yeah I don't know just a thought yeah I were they here
tonight there was a group no they were not here tonight they did submit um final plans today so there should be plenty of time between now and the 26 for departments to review those and they'll be at concom the 25th storm yeah
yeah they submitted Revis yep so the zoning public hearing is that going to include all three of our zoning it includes mod exactly sure what you're
asking but it includes yes it includes all the zoning articles uh it was advertised to include all the zoning articles um based upon tonight it sounds like um um Maple Road is likely being uh
removed that's that was my understanding yep yep so it'll include the MBTA miscellaneous yeah flood plane and lighting lighting um and um 129 again those those hearings are we
only required to open those hearings we can do initial presentations you can spend as much time as you want on them but you have all of um March and even into April to keep them open how are we handling that public
hearing we doing any presentations or anything on the flood plane and the on any of them I think we should just open the hearing and not do a presentation on the flood plane since I mean need a presentation for town
meeting so the yeah the other ones the town manager warrant articles so he can make a presentation I mean I would assume since it's a zoning warrant article that he would make the presentation at our meeting correct Evan
I I think that's reasonable at this point and then the I think Kelly right can do a short synopsis if he wants or whatever he however he wants to handle it of the lighting I mean I feel like he's given rather extensive
presentations to us along the way um yeah the the only item that you're required to hear is the zoning amendments MH but for purposes of public information and kind of uh packaging the whole thing if you want to have Kelly I
think a presentation on the general bylaw well I think we have to because it's kind of tied to the zoning change and I mean you'll have to me and he's an excellent speaker I'm not sure you need to do it as part of the planning board public hearing but I don't think it'd be
any harm I think it' be beneficial actually yeah okay and then I can prepare something for the uh NBTA related I actually I want to stop calling it MBTA related um these are just zoning bylaws changes that were
indicated by the AG I think the way the way Paul initially drafted it um I think was simply based upon the fact that it was required as part of the AG's review but yeah it is a little misleading yeah so I'll make that change
in the presentation and and how should we handle the flood plane I I I'll reach out to Christine tomorrow in the the flood plane um administrator okay if they can you know if they can attend great if they can
zoom in that' be great I mean I can put something together as a initial y i I'll also send send the board out the all of um the materials that the uh the flood plane administrator presented to you and
there's there's a variety of other information that's frequently asked questions so it's it's very similar to what the state did with MBTA zoning they have all kinds of websites I think all of that information would cover what we need to present okay um
again if there's detailed technical questions that's not really the intent of the the bylaw Amendment beyond my scope but I'll I'll put something together for that one too star now we just get you out of the
weave sometimes went for the alternate I'll take a motion you got it and she second and I second motion second by Anita all in favor hi motion to adjourn we we're getting pretty good at
this e e for